Alam Md Ferdaws, Chongsuvivatwong Virasakdi, Mahmud Hasib, Gupta Pradip Sen
Impact Foundation Bangladesh, 3rd Floor, Cosmopoliton Centre, House 22/2, Block B, Babor Road, Muhammadpur, Dhaka 1207, Bangladesh.
J Health Popul Nutr. 2013 Jun;31(2):223-30. doi: 10.3329/jhpn.v31i2.16387.
The aim of this study is to compare accessibility of vision-impaired (VI) patients to other eyecare centres before attending the mobile and stationary hospitals. Under a cross-sectional study design, VI patients were consecutively enrolled if they visited one of the three Impact Foundation Hospitals--one mobile and two stationary hospitals. The cost and service output of all hospitals were also reviewed; 27.7% of patients at the mobile and 36.8% at the two stationary hospitals had sought eyecare at other health facilities in the past. Mobile hospital patients lived closer to the hospital but spent more time in travelling, bore less direct cost, needed less extra support, and had a higher level of satisfaction on the service. They also identified more barriers to access eyecare in the past. The mobile hospital had a higher percentage of patients with accessibility problems and should continue to help the remote population in overcoming these problems.
本研究的目的是比较视力受损（VI）患者在前往流动医院和定点医院就诊之前，前往其他眼科护理中心的可及性。在横断面研究设计下，如果视力受损患者前往三家Impact Foundation医院之一就诊（一家流动医院和两家定点医院），则连续纳入研究。还对所有医院的成本和服务产出进行了评估；流动医院27.7%的患者和两家定点医院36.8%的患者过去曾在其他医疗机构寻求过眼科护理。流动医院的患者住得离医院更近，但出行时间更长，直接费用更低，所需的额外支持更少，对服务的满意度更高。他们还指出过去在获得眼科护理方面存在更多障碍。流动医院中存在可及性问题的患者比例更高，应继续帮助偏远地区的人群克服这些问题。
